From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Federico Beffa Subject: Re: Preparing for the libc/locale upgrade Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 17:53:43 +0200 Message-ID: References: <871tdi6zo1.fsf@gnu.org> <87pp10qauc.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42506) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhJhU-0007Dy-1A for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 11:53:52 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhJhP-0002Y4-TF for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 11:53:47 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87pp10qauc.fsf@gnu.org> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: =?UTF-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: Guix-devel On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > Federico Beffa skribis: > >> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 10:45 PM, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wr= ote: > > [...] > >> From my point of view Mark's suggestion sounds as the most acceptable > > Which one is it? For some reason I don't see Mark's message on the ML. So instead of a link, a copy/paste from his email: " I think I know a workaround: leave LOCPATH unset, and make /run/current-system/locale a symlink to freshly generated locales for glibc 2.22. Guix-compiled software is configured to look for locales there if LOCPATH is unset. " > >>> IMO Guix is not at fault; rather, it sheds light on a shortcoming of >>> libc=E2=80=99s handling of locale data, which was designed with single-= libc >>> systems in mind. >> >> I fully agree with your statement. However, leaving Guix users (I'm >> not talking about developers) exposed to such problems is not what I >> expect from a high quality product. > > I agree. > >> A brute force fix may be to tell each Guix program where the locale is >> with a wrapper. This is for sure not elegant (and there may be better >> ways, you know better...), but the point is that probably a way to >> preserve a good end user experience out of the box does exist and, >> from my point of view, we should provide it. > > Well, we could ship 110+ MiB of locales along with our libc, as we used > to do=C2=B9; adding a wrapper basically amounts to this. That way, no ne= ed > to fiddle with LOCPATH, the right locale data will always be found. > > But honestly, I think that sucks. It shouldn=E2=80=99t be all-or-nothing= . > > Alternately, we could patch our libc to honor GUIX_LOCPATH (in addition > to LOCPATH), so that the host distro=E2=80=99s programs are unaffected, a= nd thus > don=E2=80=99t end up aborting with that assertion failure. > > That=E2=80=99s the best kludge that comes to mind (yeah that=E2=80=99s an= oxymoron ;-)). >From my point of view either one is much better than the current situation. Thanks, Fede